parenting in the name of god no greater joy ministries and the bible

PARENTING IN THE NAME OF GOD:
No Greater Joy Ministries and the Bible
By David J. Dyck and C.L. Dyck

DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION

This review is a free resource. It is not for sale or resale.
Parenting in the Name of God by David J. Dyck and C.L. Dyck is licensed under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
Copyright Information

This review may be reproduced or electronically transmitted only as a whole, unaltered and with attribution and copyright information intact,
for personal and/or educational use, for free. It is provided strictly as an informational resource to the Christian parenting community and may not be sold.
This is a review of materials from No Greater Joy Ministries, and as such, it quotes those materials where necessary for clarity and accuracy.
It is our desire to allow the ministry adequate room to speak for itself. The materials of No Greater Joy are the intellectual property of Michael and/or Debi
Pearl. For further information, see the U.S. Copyright Office summary of fair use copyright doctrine on “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for
purposes of illustration or comment” at: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html.

All Scripture quotations are from the King James Version unless specifically indicated otherwise.

Getting the Most From This Review

Summarized materials are cited with footnotes, and we encourage readers to look them up and to read this review’s information
in conjunction with NGJ's materials in order to evaluate the issues addressed for themselves.
The Pearls make large portions of their material freely available on their website, NoGreaterJoy.org.

Disclaimer
This information is offered on an as-is basis, for general informational purposes only. We make no representations as to accuracy, completeness,
currentness, suitability, or validity of any information contained herein, and will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information or any losses,
injuries, or damages arising from its use.

Cover art is copyright Heather Young and is used under license from ElasahArt.com.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface: Who We Are.........................................................................................................................

i

I. Preliminary Considerations..........................................................................................................

1



Scope of the Question and Intended Audience



Addressing Blurred Lines Between Personal and Ministry Life



Defining Community and Its Role

II. Addressing Parenting Techniques...............................................................................................


Why We Don’t Include Parenting Techniques



Good Parents, Bad Methods and Other Contentions



The Best-Laid Plans

III. Examining the Doctrine of No Greater Joy Ministries...........................................................


The Doctrine of Man



Concerns



Doctrine



Further Concerns



Conclusion

IV. Concerns on the Person of Christ...........................................................................................


On Agreement and Disagreement in Wording



Christ’s Person



What Does This Wording Mean?



Non-Righteous Christ?



The Obedient Life of Christ

V. Teachings on the Person of Christ...........................................................................................


Sustaining Relationship



Faithfulness and the Question of Merit



Adamic Righteousness and Unrighteousness

5

8

16

26

VI. Doctrine of Christ, Concluded.............................................................................................


Concerns



Doctrine



Conclusion

VII. Concerns on the Atonement of Christ...............................................................................


Ears to Hear: What I Heard



Obtained Human Righteousness



Obtained Human Righteousness Imputed?



The Chastisement of Our Peace



Conclusion

VIII. Doctrine of the Atonement of Jesus Christ.....................................................................


The Life is In the Blood



Something that God Didn’t Know?

IX. Sin and Salvation.................................................................................................................


The Sinful Nature



Concerns on Salvation



Doctrine of Salvation



Conclusion

X. Examining Sanctification.....................................................................................................


Concerns on The Nature of Sanctification



Doctrine of Sanctification



All Ye Who Are Weary



Conclusion

XI. To Discern Good and Evil..................................................................................................


Does Criticism of Child Discipline Methods Jeopardize Parents’ Legal Rights?



Exercising Discernment



Sample Case: “Spanking is Only a Part of Training”



Conclusion

APPENDIX: What is the Schatz Case? A Summary of Health and Wellness Implications
By Cynthia M. Kunsman, RN, BSN, MMin , ND

29

36

42

45

56

63

71

PREFACE
Who We Are

We are Christian homeschooling parents of four children, mid-teens down to late elementary, at the
time of writing. David’s background is Canadian Mennonite. Cathi-Lyn was saved at the age of 18,
having grown up with an atheist/agnostic perspective.

We had heard of No Greater Joy Ministries only once before 2010; several years before then, a friend
lent us two issues of the magazine. That was around the time our youngest was born. When online
homeschoolers began debating over the Lydia Schatz biblical chastisement death case, we felt it
important to do our own research and come to our own understanding of what was being discussed.
This review was written as a result of that research, initially as a series of blog posts at
ScitaScienda.com. The e-book edition was expanded for clearer explanations, greater detail and
additional support materials. It has been reviewed by an eight-member spiritual advisory team and
professionally edited. We have chosen to include terms and definitions at the beginning of chapters as
necessary, and in expanded form as an appendix, because the level of discussion in the homeschooling
community varies widely. It’s our desire that interested parents be equipped to access all information
they may wish to, and to respond at all levels without feeling intimidated by the language used by
others.
Because this is an e-book, intended to be accessed via the internet, we’ve taken the approach of
using online articles as the preferred footnote resource. Many of these parallel the No Greater Joy
books. We attempt to note where online and print texts differ, but the web is subject to change, as are
various print editions. We recommend that you check sources for yourself.

Our primary calling has been raising our children together in the Lord. Here’s a bit about our secondary
activities.
David J. Dyck is a founder and board member of Westman Bible Conference, an annual day of
presentations held in Manitoba, Canada to provide rural churches with support, scriptural exhortation,
and information on defending the faith “yet with gentleness and reverence.” Conference audio and
information can be found online at WestmanBibleConference.ca.
Cathi-Lyn Dyck is a freelance writer/editor whose articles have been published in
Homeschooling Today, The Old Schoolhouse, and the Canadian magazine Homeschool Horizons. She
writes a bi-monthly women’s column on marriage for PositivelyFeminine.org, a non-profit web
ministry to Christian women.
i

I.
Preliminary Considerations

Key Points for This Chapter
In this chapter we set the ground rules for how we’ll discuss this topic. We talk about types of discussion that
interfere with biblical discernment. We explain why it’s not necessary to put the lives of practitioners of various
methods under a magnifying glass in order to determine whether a Christian method is true or false. Finally, we
talk about the difficulty involved in knowing where spheres of authority and group responsibility begin and end.
How should we react to controversy, and what should we expect of others?

Terms and Definitions:
Ad hominem, appeal to emotion, genetic fallacy

Types of false reasoning which are both logically false and counter to biblical
discernment. See Appendix B: Glossary.

Anecdotal evidence

Evidence based on eyewitness account or personal stories.

Edification

Building up; an archaic term that remains in Christian language and refers to building
each other up in spiritual wisdom.

Theology

Human system of explaining the knowledge of God.

Before we get into any analysis of the theology expressed by No Greater Joy Ministries (hereafter
called NGJ), some groundwork is needed.
The intention is not to examine the life of Michael and Debi Pearl, or the lives of those who use
their material. If the material of NGJ stands, it must stand on its own merits, regardless of the
imperfections of its creators or users. If it fails, it also fails on its own merit, without regard to the lives
lived by those who use it. It cannot be condemned, nor can it be rescued, by genetic fallacy, ad
hominem, or appeal to emotion: Biblical truth is the only source by which to measure its accuracy. So,
while this is a very emotional issue, it requires a careful, reasoned look.
Whether or not the Pearls are nice people or cold-hearted spankers, and whether or not the
families of Sean Paddock and Lydia Schatz1 were nice people, or angry spankers, misled or selfdeceived, or anything else, is not in view here.
The biblical value of instructional materials for marriage and parenting can’t be determined by
how individuals use the materials, whether they do so for extreme benefit or extreme harm. Many other
factors contribute to people’s behaviour, such as other teachings, community and relational input, and
(mis)understanding of how to filter out non-constructive information or reject inaccurate doctrine.
The continued compilation of anecdotal evidence does help to establish related factors and
trends, and their interplay with one another. We certainly encourage this in balance.
But our key responsibility is to examine our own lives, what we bring into them, and what we
share with others as a result. Our focus is to look at core teachings and examine their faithfulness to
1

Scripture, which we believe to be the full, verbally inspired word of God in the original manuscripts,
transmitted to us with full and verifiable reliability despite time and translation.
In answering questions for oneself, we would strongly suggest that the place to start is biblical
theology, and commonsense defined thereby, rather than personalities and anecdotes. This does not in
any way negate anecdotal evidence. The concern is to first establish some means of understanding and
interpreting the various positions put forward.

Scope of the Question and Intended Audience
We will look at the theology of the TTUAC book itself, and review articles and audio from the website
and the NGJ print compilations for context and balance. We will not be forming conclusions, either in
agreement or disagreement with NGJ, on any parenting philosophy which is found to lack clear biblical
mandate. Also, the scope of this writing will not include political or legal considerations not directly
related to the examination of NGJ's theology.
Our intended audience may be information-seekers of any beliefs or background, but we’re
writing primarily for the use of those who are considering the following:





Is it wise and worthwhile to voice support or criticism for a particular position or ministry on
this issue?
Should I use or discontinue using the materials of NGJ?
What is the controversy all about?
Should I ask my homeschooling organization to take a position on NGJ and its materials?

The Christian homeschooling community has its supporters and detractors of NGJ. Emotions
and peer influence can make it difficult to ask and answer questions (yes, we adults have these
struggles too). We hope to be of some small service to those seeking further information within the
Christian community. As such, our main address is to those of conservative Christian beliefs, and we’ll
be using language and cultural references which are familiar to that group.

Addressing Blurred Lines of Authority
In the Christian culture, and particularly in the homeschooling subculture, it’s sometimes very difficult
to draw a line between personal life and ministry life. We recognize that, for some, there is no felt
distinction between doctrinal examination and personal examination. This can be a point for those
involved in pastoring or other formal public work; those operating a home-based business to the
Christian market; or those for whom homemaking is a form of interpersonal/community ministry.
Those in such circumstances often share their lives fully and sacrificially with their circles, the
personal and social blending seamlessly with more formal ministry. For homeschoolers, children may
go almost everywhere with their parents, and are directly involved in public contact relating to ministry
or business. Likewise, the ministry group or the customer base often has direct contact with the home.
Deut. 6:5-7, which have been popularly co-opted as “the homeschooling verses,” are often referenced
to express a pragmatic non-distinction between the teaching of doctrine and personal Christian living.
However, this does not change the distinction between the God-breathed and the human-inspired (2
2

Tim. 3:16-17), and that’s where Christians must focus.
The Word of our Lord stands forever. Here, in God’s Word, we can begin a walk together in
fruitful, edifying discussion, hopefully for the benefit of everyone concerned as well as that of our
children.

Defining Community and Its Role
In this case in particular, the idea of community is shifting and vague. Michael Pearl does pastor a
church. It constitutes one form of community unit. The Pearls’ materials and influence are reasonably
widespread throughout conservative Christian homeschooling circles, which may include churches,
local homeschool groups, online networks, or loose associations of people across large geographical
distances via internet friendships.
The Pearls also teach on marriage and Christian living. As we begin to review their material,
some vibrant discussions are already ensuing within our marriage itself. Dave’s childhood background
is conservative Christian; Cat's original background is atheist-feminist. While we’ve built our own
personal life in Christ, and our own convictions about the details of living it, we still tend to filter
information in different ways, with different emphases or assumed implications. Going by the
philosophy that the home is the basic social unit, many marriages and families like ours are involved in
this discussion as microcosms of community.
For many who do not have direct association with the Pearls, this issue will be one of deciding
whether or not to own, retain, or share their materials; whether to include their material and those
similar to it on recommended resource lists, in libraries, or perhaps on book fair tables for those who
participate in conferences. Each group and set of relationships must and should act independently,
within its own context and convictions, with Scriptural consideration, prayer and sincerity of heart
before God.
We will likewise attempt to do that for ourselves, and God willing, for the information and
edification of others along the way. We welcome discussion, questions, clarifications and corrections.
At the same time, we realize that our work may be appealing to no one in the end. We can only offer to
do our imperfect best, and ask for assistance in our attempt, in the desire that we—and you with us—
might express devotion to Jesus Christ, and love for the fellowship of sinners who are redeemed in
Him.
____
1. Both children died as a result of their parents' corporal chastisement methods. Sean Paddock was killed in 2006;
Lydia Schatz in 2010. See Appendix for further information.
NOTES
There are many book reviews and many opinions available on the Pearls’ book, To Train Up a Child; however, our
recommendation is for people to read the book for themselves and form their own conclusions.
An older full text is apparently available online:
http://www.achristianhome.org/to_train_up_a_child.htm (Accessed April 24, 2011)
It appears to correspond to many of the quotes being used in reviews around the web. It is useful for overview purposes;
some content is slightly different from the 2008 print edition, which contains updates that are, in some cases, apparently
based on articles written in the interim between editions. Some of the 2008 wording is clarified, some expanded or reduced,

3

some rendered into more generic terminology than the older edition. The changes do not affect the overall context or
argumentation of the book.

4

II.
Addressing Parenting Techniques

Key Points for This Chapter
In this chapter, we look at the limitations of discussing Christian parenting using a human focus. We talk about
why doctrine is foundational to understanding individual behaviour.

Why We Don’t Include Parenting Techniques
First, online discussion of parenting techniques often fails to take into consideration the international
dynamics. Here in Canada, the law states as of this writing that it is illegal to spank a child under the
age of 2 or over the age of 12, and it is considered abuse to use an implement other than the hand or to
spank hard enough to leave a mark.1 In our country, the Pearls’ material advocates illegal behaviour
which may tend to endanger families. In the United States, it’s increasingly being determined that
religious values are no shelter for abusive treatment (a definition which may vary by local
jurisdiction),2 negating any defensive weight to NGJ’s In Defense of Biblical Chastisement articles3
which claim to present a religious justification to naysayers of the To Train Up a Child (hereafter called
TTUAC) method. It is important that parents understand their religious values do not protect their
child-raising method from legal consequences.
Even more importantly, we do not believe in analyzing this topic solely based on outward
actions and consequences. There are a variety of opinions across the spectrum on spanking,
breastfeeding, rewards and consequences, and the relationship of men and women within the marriage.
Every behaviour (the things we do) is a tool for seeking an outcome (we can reasonably expect results
from our actions). On a range of events, you might look at it something like this:
VALUES FORMATION — BELIEF — INTENTION — ACTION — OUTCOME

Where only the last three components are considered, the core of the issue is never really
addressed. We can argue back and forth all day about intentions, actions and outcomes, but without
understanding how people’s values are influenced, and how their foundational beliefs are structured,
we’ll accomplish little in terms of sharing knowledge and growth.

5

Good Parents, Bad Methods and Other Contentions
Here, we use the word “good” in an everyday sense, of course, not a theological one—that would be a
whole other can of worms. For the purposes here, it just means parents who are a benefit to their
children. However, notice already that we can’t even begin to measure the idea of beneficial parenting
without encountering debate, because it’s a values-based term. The instant reflex is to go straight to
arguing about what actions benefit children, to debating the value of intentions, and to dissecting a
surface layer of professed or assumed beliefs.
How can some parents derive good out of a method that has bad traits? How can bad parents
exist in a milieu of what we’d call “good” parenting philosophy? Both happen. We’ve all seen it.
While the core of parenting revolves around intentions, the associated actions and outcomes are
based not on those intentions, but on the underlying beliefs. In order to understand how the actions of
individuals within a basic category could have hugely variant outcomes, we have to take a good look at
the intent behind the action.
The pattern is illustrated in a negative context in the book of James:

Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown
of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him. Let no man say when he is
tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he
any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth
forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren. — James 1:12-16

In being carried away, we see a shift of values. This is about Christians, people who have a
commitment to God and knowledge of His Word. But James has already warned about a lack of strongmindedness. While that kind of personality often gets reviled for being unsubmissive, troublemaking,
divisive or uncharitable, being easily led in our human relationships is not actually a good Christian
trait. It reveals a lack of faith, a preponderance of doubt. It’s a symptom of vacuum in the area where
beliefs are meant to reside. As a result, the values are constantly being formed and reformed, and the
troubled soul is like one tossed in the waves of the sea.
So, blessed is a person who sticks it out when their personal values are put under heavy
pressure, provided those values are grounded in the character of God and loving relationship with Him.
And then, an interesting thing: James warns specifically about making martyrs of ourselves for
the cause of Christ. Yes, there’s the more blatant blaming of God for bad things. But there’s also the
less blatant version of blaming God, where God is “testing” us, and it’s up to our righteousness and
spiritual fibre to pull us through. Considering how much James has to say about pride and surface
goodness, we lean in favour of that less-obvious interpretation of his warning.
No created goodness is exempt from the problem of potential slide into unrighteous selfreliance, because only God can successfully rely upon His own goodness. A subtle ingress of spiritual
pride is the key factor in the fall of Lucifer from heaven, if we read the metaphorical story of Isaiah 14
as illustrative of that angelic event. But regardless of how one reads it, one can see the influence of
pride in Isaiah’s story because it’s everywhere in the human story too: “I will be as good as God.”

6

Exercising Biblical Discernment
So subtly do the values reform, and so subtly does the foundation of belief shift. When lust for
goodness—a deceptive, false kind of goodness—has conceived, it brings forth sin. And when sin is
accomplished, even if it wears a garment of light, it brings forth death.
Evaluating one another’s actions and intentions—without deeper consideration of beliefs and
values—is a slippery slope which leads to this very thing. Instead, we absolutely must ask questions
about the underlying beliefs and their relationship to God’s Word. We must take a look at how the
values of a system of beliefs are formed. In what direction and by what forces are the beliefs reshaped
by the teachings proffered? Is it in the direction of open and free relationship to God, freedom of
conscience and conviction? Or are the values being shifted in the direction of placing one’s trust in the
teachings or the teacher? Or even simply in oneself?
Discernment is the ability to recognize distinct ideas. Biblical discernment refers to “rightly
dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 3:16), but also to exercising obedience to the command of God to
“be wise as serpents, innocent as doves.” The reason? Because Christ sends His servants forth “as
sheep in the midst of wolves.” (Matt. 10:16)
The verse-numbering divisions of the English-language Scripture are not canon, but they do
have an interesting quirk. Counted front to back and halved, this turns out to be at the center of them
all:

It is better to take refuge in the Lord
Than to trust in man.
—Ps. 118:8

_____

1. http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/researchpublications/prb0510-e.htm See Section A in particular for an
explanation of the reasoning used in determining the bounds of Canadian law. (Accessed May 16, 2011)

2. See the National Training Center for Child Protection website: When a Child Abuser Has a Bible: Investigating
Child Abuse Sanctioned or Condoned by a Religious Leader. http://ncptc.nonprofitoffice.com/vertical/Sites/
%7B8634A6E1-FAD2-4381-9C0D-5DC7E93C9410%7D/uploads/%7B6F94085B-08C3-4A60B213-6CAE504841C9%7D.PDF (Accessed May 16, 2011)

3. http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2001/may/01/in-defense-of-biblical-chastisement-part-1/
and http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2001/may/01/in-defense-of-biblical-chastisementpart-2/ (Accessed May 16, 2011)

7

III.
Examining the Doctrine of
No Greater Joy Ministries

Key Points for This Chapter
In this chapter, we give a first impression of encountering the NGJ faith statement. We summarize a back-andforth between husband and wife as new teachings are encountered and examined. We seek to illustrate using
discernment to dissect jargon, because jargon often obscures meaning. What traits of thinking should Christians
watch for in discerning doctrine? How does a person sift the language involved?
Terms and Definitions
Atonement

The reconciliation of God and humankind through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ; reparation for an
offense or injury.

Condemnatory

Adjective form describing condemnation.

Dichotomy

A division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely
different.

Eisegesis

Reading outside meaning into a text; creating a personal interpretation which relies on information or
assumptions not arising from the text being interpreted.

Hermeneutics

The study of correct biblical interpretation.

Hypothetical

A guess or conjecture, often based on small amounts of observation but lacking a wider, proven body
of evidence.

Moral culpability

Being held guilty before God for moral reasons.

Proof-texts

Portions of a text quoted in isolation from their original context, so that their wording supports the
quoter’s point whether or not it was the original intention and meaning of the text.

Salvation

Deliverance from the power and effects of sin; alternately, can mean liberation from ignorance or
illusion, preservation from destruction or failure, or deliverance from danger or difficulty.

Substitutionary

Describes the act, process, or result of substituting one thing for another.

8

The faith statement1 on the NGJ website opens with the declaration, “In these days and times, it is
important that you know what a ministry believes.”
We heartily agree.
The NGJ Faith Statement
Two points in particular leap out from a first glance at the Pearls’ faith statement: the doctrine of man,
and certain specifics of the doctrine of salvation. There is also some suggestion that the Pearls’ first
point, their stance on the inspired value of the King James Version, may affect their understanding of
child-training passages.2
Our purpose here is to advocate careful thought and freedom of personal conviction. While
recognizing there is always worldview conflict in social ethics, politics and legislation on this topic, we
remind the reader that our focus is on critical thinking regarding theology and hermeneutics.
We advise those who read NGJ’s doctrinal statement to also read the Scripture references
listed as supporting passages, particularly where the Gospel is concerned. This is a key practice in
discerning the meaning and interpretation of any ministry’s theology.
The points we’ll look at here are not totally foreign to conservative Christians (many are youngearth creationists, many believe in an age of moral accountability, and many cherish the belief that
infants who die will go directly to heaven without condemnatory moral culpability). For those who
hold such convictions, the insertion of modified theology may not immediately stand out.
We’ll open with Cat’s concerns, followed by Dave’s doctrinal analysis. As women often tend to
be the ones who read and absorb homeschooling and child-training materials before their husbands do,
we include the following exhortation.
Cat: Does the Bible specifically instruct women to be discerning?
Dave: If it speaks to them about salvation, it speaks to them about discernment. In the Bible,
discernment is not gender-specific. Also, the Proverbs woman is not just an active woman, she’s a
thinking woman.
Cat: I see that she knows how to do good and not evil throughout the full span of her marriage (Prov.
31:12). That’s highly discerning, actually.

The Doctrine of Man
We’ll begin with some thoughts from the NGJ faith statement on the doctrine of humankind, as
conveyed by Michael Pearl. Points of interest to us are in bold text. On the doctrine of man, the faith
statement says,

We believe that man was created in the span of a twenty-four hour period. He was created
perfect physically and constitutionally, including the moral and spiritual essence. Man,
though complete and entire, wanting nothing, was, in his innocence, without character.
9

The tree of knowledge of good and evil, a moral testing ground, was, in the wisdom of
God, the perfect opportunity for spiritual development. The natural constitution of man
(desire for food, etc.) became the basis for temptation.

Because there’s no Scripture from which this assertion can be drawn, it’s impossible to say what it
means in biblical terms to claim that sinless humans existed “without character,” or what precisely they
lacked in “spiritual development.” However, To Train Up a Child makes the following claim:
When God wanted to “train” his first two children not to touch, He did not place the
forbidden object out of their reach. Instead, He placed the “tree of knowledge of good and
evil” in the “midst of the garden” (Gen. 3:3). Since it was readily accessible in the middle
of the garden, they would be exposed to its temptation more often. God’s purpose was not
to save the tree, but rather, to train the couple.
Note that the name of the tree was not just “knowledge of evil,” but, “knowledge of good
and evil.” By exercising their wills not to eat, they would have learned the meaning of
“good” as well as “evil.” Eating the tree’s fruit was not the only way in which they could
come to knowledge of good and evil, but it was a forbidden shortcut. [all emphases in
original]3

Cat: Concerns
I note that the plain purpose of the origins account—to give an account of origins—has been co-opted
into an unsupported hypothetical about God’s purposes, His thoughts, and His “training” in an ideal
world. There is a subtle false dichotomy created here: the idea that, in choosing to disobey, Adam and
Eve gained the knowledge of evil; whereas, in choosing to obey, they would have learned the
knowledge of good. However, from the greater context of Scripture, the knowledge of good is not
founded on our perfect obedience, nor the exercise of our will to good, but in the character of God.4
The explanation is attractive because it inserts a sense of reasoning into the passage regarding
the tree’s name. However, in this very passage, we see the same sort of eisegesis5 committed by a
character defined in Scripture as the epitome of anti-God.

“For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye
shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” — Gen. 3:5

This, too, makes unsupportable claims about what God is thinking and what His motivations are. In
order to be true to my profession of being a Bible-believing mother, I cannot accept eisegesis as
foundational grounds for a system of child-rearing. It is not doctrine—it is personal speculation about
hypothetical doctrine. 2 Pet. 1:20 gives the Bible’s take on that: no Scripture is of any private
interpretation.
10

Almost immediately upon encountering this ministry, I am prompted by its handling of
Scripture to exercise caution when it claims theology as a basis for the resources it provides. What I
must next determine is whether the ministry’s theology forms the basis of the parenting materials.

Dave: Doctrine
The fact that Adam could commune with God (Gen. 2:15ff.) meant that he had moral character. God
says that He made man in His own image (Gen. 1:26). God would have been lying to make that
statement if He created them “without character.” God Himself, in His own image, has moral character.
Moral testing ground? How much more developed, spiritually, can you be than being “without
sin”? That is our ultimate goal as believers, to be sinless in the presence of God (Rom. 8:29, 1 John
3:2).
The natural constitution of man as the basis for temptation? Pearl is blending two states. The
natural constitution of man today is sinful (James 1:13-15), but that’s not the basis for Adam’s
temptation. Adam was in a sinless state, as Christ (“the last Adam,” Rom. 5:14, 1 Cor. 15:45) was when
He was tempted. We, on the other hand, are not born in a state of sinless perfection or moral neutrality.
“In sin my mother conceived me” (Ps. 51:5).
So we have to ask: if the natural constitution is the basis of temptation, and if Adam was created
in the image of God, how does that correlate to Christ’s temptation? (Matt. 4) Was the temptation of the
Son of God based on His natural constitution? Was His triumph over temptation due to His mastery of
his constitution—His hunger, His physical human drives?
No. The basis for temptation in both cases was Satan’s lies. And the victory of Christ came
through applying the truth of the Word of God.

Cat: Further Concerns
In TTUAC, Mr. Pearl also states, “By your enforcement, your children are learning about moral
government, duty, responsibility and, in the event of failure, accountability, rewards and punishment.”6
For those versed in the history of American theology, this creates a problem of indistinct
definitions. Moral government had a different meaning two hundred years ago than it has had since the
mid-twentieth century. While those who have read Jonathan Edwards or John Wesley may take it to
mean God’s governance of moral beings (as distinguished from His governance of nature), the 20thcentury meaning of the term has an eerie alignment to Pearl’s description of a “blank slate” state for
mankind at creation and at birth.7
While Mr. Pearl does not expand here on his intended meaning of the theological phrase “moral
government,” his repeated use of the term in connection with his private interpretation of child
development gives the appearance that modern moral government theology is a contributor to his ideas.
As the GotQuestions.org doctrine website puts it, “Moral government theology claims that man
is born morally neutral and is always capable of choosing whether or not to sin, and his moral character
is determined by his choices.”8
This is not a standard view of sin, and has deep implications for how we relate to God and to
other human beings. What we have here is at best another example of how easily jargon can confuse
the underlying meaning, and at worst a jargonized expression of a deeply unbiblical idea.
11

I find it very telling that, at the conclusion of his doctrinal statement on the nature of man, Pearl
states, “Apart from the free gift of God through the substitutionary work of Christ there is no hope of
salvation,” and then proceeds to redefine that common Christianese language regarding the cross with
the following verses:

Romans 12:3-8 (summarized due to length; click to
view in full at BibleGateway.com)

Encourages humble character, discusses the different
spiritual actions of Christians.

1 Cor. 12:4-11 (summarized due to length; click to
view in full at BibleGateway.com)

Teaches on the diversity of gifts, administrations and
operations given to believers by the triune God.

1 Cor. 12:28

“And God hath set some in the church, first apostles,
secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that
miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments,
diversities of tongues.”

Eph. 4:7-12 (summarized due to length; click to
view in full at BibleGateway.com)

As above; also discusses Christ’s descent into the lower
parts of the earth and ascent into heaven, leading
captivity captive.

Again, Pearl’s chosen jargon words in this situation are: substitutionary, salvation. This is a bait-andswitch of atonement language normally focussed on Christ with proof-texts focussed on the spiritual
actions and character of Christians. We’ll see if this strange repurposing of language is ongoing, as
we’ll add greater context by examining further doctrinal themes and claims.
Elsewhere, along with the creation account, Pearl uses teachings on the “age of accountability”
to shoehorn his beliefs about morality, sin and salvation into language which may be less alien on the
surface. However, age of accountability too is a point that, he acknowledges,9 has no clear Scriptural
definition, though he seems willing again to commit massive eisegesis, inserting a number of ideas into
the passages he references on the topic. Pearl acknowledges that he holds “a singular view” about
moral development, yet he is not deterred from presenting it on the authority of years of practice (see
NGJ web article The Salvation of Children, 2007).10
Again, as a Bible-believing mother, the fact that an individual holds and practices a conviction
for years cannot be my rationale for accepting it. Beliefs must be clearly founded on Scripture, not on
eisegesis.

12

Dave: Concluding Thoughts
Pearl has a very unusual view of the Garden of Eden, the nature of man, and what God intends us to
learn about ourselves and our children from the biblical origins account.
If the moral nature is not what Pearl says it is, then the only thing children are learning from not
touching a “no-no” object is not to touch it, or they will be punished. Not even 100% cheeriness, joy
and consistency11 changes the fact that physical discipline is being used as a spiritual tool against the
lusts of the flesh—which apparently means the physical body and its drives, rather than the sinful
nature. In Pearl’s doctrine, those lusts are not spiritual traits as Scripture records in Gal. 5:19-21:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; adultery, fornication,
uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife,
seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which
I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall
not inherit the kingdom of God.

Instead, Pearl claims that natural physical desires lead from a moral blank slate to the development of
sinful choices and actions.
Along with that comes the claim that child-training will lead to the ultimate “good choice,” an
expression of belief in Christian religion. But which Christ? Which Christianity?
It all depends what is meant by “substitutionary work” and “salvation.” What is being
substituted? Christ’s what for our what? Why does Pearl say substitutionary “work” rather than
substitutionary “atonement,” as is the more common terminology? The verses he references place that
little word under a magnifying glass, because the verses are all about the works Christians do by God’s
power.
Pearl might say he puts the Bible first, and everything should be defined and understood by the
Bible. If so, we get something that looks like this:
1. Verses on Christian works define the meaning of the word “work.”
2. “Work” has an adverb attached to it: “substitutionary.”
3. The meaning of “substitutionary” is defined by what the adverb is modifying: “work,”
which is defined by the verses Pearl has chosen. The substitution is not the familiar
reference point of Christ taking our place in paying the satisfaction of God’s righteous
wrath against sin. Rather, Pearl posits/presents spiritual works substituting for works of
the flesh.
4. The statement, “Apart from the free gift of God through the substitutionary work of
Christ there is no hope of salvation,” would then mean our only hope of salvation is
doing spiritual works as gifted by God, rather than the free gift of Christ’s redemptive
work on the cross.
Also, Pearl does not say “the substitutionary work of Christ on the cross.” He only says, “the
substitutionary work of Christ.” None of the verses referenced speak about the cross. They speak about
church order and giftings in the body of believers. That means the expected context has also been
13

removed from the familiar jargon.
Hopefully this is not actually the line of reasoning involved. If it is not, we would be delighted
to see Mr. Pearl correct his doctrinal statement so that the religious jargon doesn’t interfere with what
he intends to bring forth from the verses he points to.
This brings up another question. What are we being saved from? As we found when compiling
the glossary for this chapter, there is more than one definition for “salvation.” Even if we say “salvation
from sin,” we have already seen that Pearl has a different idea of how sin works in people than what
most Bible-believing Christians hold to.
What if Michael Pearl is wrong? What if we parents are wrong? We’re fallen creatures
ourselves. Pearl leaves no allowance for the possibility of being wrong about moral development and
child-training, because eternal loss is staked on this question.12 TTUAC kids are supposed to obey
without questioning, even if their perception is that the parent is wrong.13 Are children always wrong in
those perceptions?
If we succeed in teaching those around us of any age that it’s wrong to think differently than the
person in charge, their reactions will never provide us with accurate feedback about the real impact of
our decision-making.14
What then shall we say to these things? Do we continue unquestioning, that grace may increase?
May it never be. Rather, if anyone lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, “that giveth to all men
liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” (James 1:5)
And upbraideth not. God grants wisdom freely and without reproach.
This Scripture is effectual for you, reader.
_____
1. http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/who-is-ngj/what-we-believe/ (Accessed Oct. 31, 2010)
2. See http://www.biblechild.com/#book for further information on Thy Rod and Thy Staff They Comfort Me:
Christians and the Spanking Controversy by Israeli biblical scholar Samuel Martin. You may wish to evaluate the
contrasting original-language examination of rod-training verses by Mr. Martin, locate other viewpoints along the
spectrum, and study through to your own conclusions. We do not intend this to mean that we advocate any
particular resource, but to encourage readers to carefully examine the wide variety of available messages and ideas
about Christian parenting in light of the Bible.

3. Michael and Debi Pearl, To Train Up a Child (self-published, 2008 edition), 5.
4. For advanced commentary on God as the source of goodness, please see web articles Less Real Than We Think,
More Real Than We Want (http://www.marcschooley.com/blog/?p=546) and Thoughts on the Euthyphro Dilemma
(http://www.marcschooley.com/blog/?p=39) by theologian Marc Schooley.

5. See also: The Garden of Eden (http://www.averynearlytea.com/2006/04/garden-of-eden.html) by Dana Hanley
6. Pearl and Pearl, To Train Up a Child, 5.
7. http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0184a.html (Accessed May 12, 2011)
8. http://www.gotquestions.org/moral-government-theology.html. (Accessed May 12, 2011)
9. http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2007/august/15/the-salvation-of-children/. (Accessed
May 12, 2011)
10. Ibid.

11. http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2009/december/03/cheerful-authoritative-consistent/
14

(Accessed May 12, 2011)

12. In the web article “In Defense of Biblical Chastisement Part 1,” Pearl states, “To give up the use of the rod is to
give up our views of human nature, God, eternity, judgment, etc. Most of all, to give up the use of the rod is to
abandon our children to a fate that is more cruel than jail—a life of self-will and unruliness.” Further on, a section
of the article is titled, “Proper application of the rod is essential to communicating the Christian world-view.”
http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2001/may/01/in-defense-of-biblical-chastisement-part-1/
(Accessed May 12, 2011)

13. Pearl writes, “The first level of child training is to constrain them to obey all direct commands…” He continues,
“When I suspected that the child was giving half-hearted obedience, I instinctively went after it as if it were overt
rebellion. You must cause the child to let go of all expressions of defiance. Demand that the little one surrender her
very body language and every gesture to authority…” (“More Than Obedience?”
http://www.nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2005/march/06/more-than-obedience/ Accessed May 12,
2011)

14. For potential consequences of this type of training, see web article The 49 Character Qualities of Ruth #11. (http://
nolongerquivering.com/2010/03/13/the-49-character-qualities-of-ruth-11/) Rather than teaching the knowledge of
good and evil, it teaches children to deny both their innate conscience and their taught knowledge of good and evil,
which can in fact open them to abuse by adults around them, even in a “gated” spiritual community. The
unavoidable problem with abusers is that they are highly skilled at manipulating a community’s “gating” rules and
abusing trust, including our trust as parents. Something more than rules and obedience to them must prevail.

15

IV.
Concerns on the Person of Christ
By C.L. Dyck

Key Points for This Chapter
In this chapter, Cathi-Lyn continues to examine the theological roots of the parenting material she is presented
with, and to consider the implications for her life and faith as a mother and woman of God. Her husband pointed
out some important questions in the last chapter: Which Christ? Which Christianity? Following Dave’s lead, she
seeks to discern answers by studying NGJ’s doctrine of Christ and its relationship to the Pearl child-training
concept.

Terms and Definitions
Assumption

In logic, this simply means what ideas we accept, rather than referring to jumping to a conclusion.

Eisegetical

Using eisegesis, or founded on eisegesis.

Premise

In logic, a thing that is assumed to be true (it may or may not actually be true, depending on what previous
premises were used to form the assumption under discussion).

Thesis statement

A thesis statement provides a clear summary of the writer’s position by making a definite assertion which
will then be supported by further discussion. It shows the writer’s main emphasis and the method of
reasoning used to make the writer’s case.

On Agreement and Disagreement in Wording
Commonality of Word Choice
Let me note up front that NGJ does use the language of fundamental evangelical-style belief in many
cases; the Pearls present Spurgeon, for instance, as a witnessing resource. They often use “Christ
alone” in speaking of salvation and the effectiveness of God’s Word. That’s recognized. But Dave has
brought up the point that a deeper layer of premises seems to be at work, affecting the meaning of
surface language. This comes out in comparing NGJ’s Scripture references to their doctrinal
statements, as is the case with any ministry or faith statement.
Commonality of language is useful only when assigned word meanings are in agreement. If, for
example, the word “sinful” means something different to me than it does to you, then we may say the
same sentences and still totally disagree in foundational beliefs and resultant practices.

16

Discerning Differences
One way to determine this, as mentioned previously, is to look at the verses associated with each point
in the doctrinal statement. When people compose such documents, if they are eisegetical, each doctrinal
jargon phrase forms a framework which acts as a lens. The view of associated Scripture verses is
through that lens. If the statements and the verses don’t seem to say the same thing, or if the verses
don’t seem to make sense next to the doctrinal statements (particularly when you read the verses in the
surrounding context of their chapter and book of the Bible), then reinterpretation is happening.
Christians often don’t look at the verses. They also have a reflex whereby, if the verses don’t
make sense, they ignore them—assume they must not understand, or some such—and read doctrinal
claims through their own built-in religious filters, according to the jargonish understanding they’re
accustomed to, rather than questioning the writer’s jargon.
This is how error creeps in. It’s a solid antidote to discernment. When things don’t line up
according to biblical teaching, warning bells should go off, rather than the spiritual reflex going to
sleep. Wives and mothers, we have t